Archive for March, 2008

APA Electronic References

My dissertation proprosal is coming along nicely, so while I’m waiting for feedback from my committee I’m working carefully through my APA references.

APA Supplement
In the LEAD 880 Proposal Development class, the instructors linked to a new Andrews document about the new APA rules for citing from the Internet. I can’t find it online to link it here. The document recommends the full APA Supplement – 11.95 – that Bonnie Proctor’s document recommends. I knew I needed it because I’m quoting two blog entries. So I bought and downloaded that.

At first I wondered if I needed to do the doi stuff for all my journal articles – but then I realized I collected almost all of them online – so I guess I had better do so!

Endnote Upgrade
Then I upgraded my Endnote program – (Help, Endnote Program Updates) figuring that might help me.

Updated APA Style for Endnote
Then I googled “Endnote APA electronic” to see if there were any updated APA styles out there. I found this page in Australia – where the librarians fixed the Endnote style for APA so it does it better. I downloaded that to the styles folder (c:/program files/endnote/styles).

DOIs
To test it I entered a DOI for one of my journal articles. I chose the uq_apa5th style for an electronic journal article and then switched back to Endnote’s APA and I could see that the uq one does it right.

Next I’m heading over to http://www.crossref.org/ to collect DOI’s for as many references as I can. You can use the Guest Query for just one reference, or copy and paste a set of references from Endnote (Ctrl+K), add a line between each one, and search with the Simple Text Query.

I’m also fixing my references by sorting the list by RefType. Then I can carefully check all the books, all the conference papers, all the journals etc.

As I’ve been searching and finding the DOI numbers, I’ve discovered that CrossRef.org doesn’t seem to know the DOI’s for international papers. Journals from InformaWorld, for example, have DOIs, but the CrossRef.org doesn’t find them. So I’m double searching for all DOIs, first on CrossRef.org, then on Google. If I know the article came from InformaWorld, usually the DOI is already in the URL field from downloading the reference. So I can just copy and paste it from there into the DOI field.

Editing Reference Styles
As I’m doing this, I’m finding some “odd” ones that I have to figure out from the new APA reference. A powerpoint presentation, a chapter in an electronic book, etc. I figured out that if you go to Edit, Output Styles, Edit up_apa5th [or insert your filename here], then Bibliography, templates, you can see exactly how the reference is built.

I stumbled across this when I was trying to do the chapter in an electronic book. I thought I needed to create a new reference type, but really the electronic book reference has the setup for the chapter as well. If you put the chapter info it, it lists it as a chapter in a book. Otherwise it just lists as an electronic book. So figuring out how the references are put together can help you figure out what data to enter where.

These are the reference styles I edited:

  • Thesis: Author (Year). Title. Retrieved from Name of Database. Retrieved from URL (AAT Accession Number)
    Note: only do this if you got all your dissertations from ProQuest. Otherwise you’ll need the city and university info etc.
  • Online Multimedia: Created By (Year). Title [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from URL

I also created two new ones for the ERIC documents. I’m not positive these formats will be accepted, but if they aren’t, I’ll edit them again here.

First, you go to Edit, Preferences, Reference Types, and choose one of the Unused reference types. Click Modify Reference Type. Then you can turn on the fields by typing in the same name or a different name. I used a similar reference – like conference paper – to figure out what I should do. After turning on the fields you want, then go to Edit, Output Styles, Edit [your style name here], Bibliography, Templates.  I’ve been just adding to the uq_apa5th that I downloaded earlier. Here are the two I did – one for a paper and one for reports.

  •  Author (|Year of Conference|, Date|). Title|. Paper presented at the Conference Name, Conference Location. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ERIC Number)
  • Author (Year). Title. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ERIC Number)

Some of the dots & lines, italics etc. don’t come through here, so you’ll want to make your own by typing it in. But this gives you an idea of what I did.

Hope these steps and tips are helpful for you too! Please comment if you have corrections, updates, or further suggestions.

Comments (2) »

Program Director vs. Evaluator

As part of the Evaluation and Assessment competency, I’ve started reading How to Be Involved in Program Evaluation: What Every Administrator Needs to Know.

As I’m just starting to get a feel for how best to meet this competency,  I’m reading this book fairly slowly.

In the first chapter, McNeil et al. compare the differences between the program director and the evaluator (p. 17). Some of the ones that caught my attention are:

Program Director  / Evaluator
Person of immediate action / Person of deliberation
Pragmatic / Realistic
Concerned with current program / interested in replicable results (p. 17).

So far in my 10 years or so of working at the ISD, I’ve only really tried to run my program and evaluate it myself. Only occasionally, usually at the end of a grant, have my supervisors brought in an outside evaluator. Some of the evaluations I do are:

What I’m realizing is, when I run my own evaluations, I may be inadvertently missing important information, not hearing from all the participants, and possibly looking only for data that supports my program. There may be a bias.

In some cases, the program director is highly involved in evaluation and guiding it, which these authors see as a good thing (p. 32). However, involved directors need to remember that “others involved with the program must become active stakeholders in the evaluation process.” Hmm. I’m not sure yet what that means for my own practice, but I realize I need to hear from others. Who are the others? How do I hear from them? How do I involve them without burdening them?

I’m definitely seeing that using a known model to guide a person’s work makes it much less likely that an important piece will be overlooked.

Leave a comment »

The Logic of Theoretical Frameworks

Last week I attended some sessions by Gary Stager at the MACUL Conference. I blogged them both: 10 Things to Do with Laptops and Digital Democracy. While listening to the closing keynote, I also skimmed some of the articles on Stager’s website: particularly his critiques of Daniel Pink and Thomas Friedman‘s popular books.

These ideas simmered in my brain over the weekend. This was my first experience hearing Stager speak, and his thoughts are challenging and require processing. I’m still processing the new ideas.

But one piece of logic really struck me. The Andrews Leadership program focuses on laying a theoretical framework for each competency and for our research. The professors keep pushing us to deeper levels of understanding and the ability to compare, synthesis and select theoretical frameworks for our work.  I’m still learning what that really means. But Stager helped me realize why it matters.

Theoretical frameworks ground us in the knowledge by those who have gone before. It lays the foundation. Gives us shoulders to stand on. Builds on the body of knowledge already there.

As I’ve worked on the beginnings of my literature review, I’ve realized the importance of really understanding what others have done.

Stager’s critique of those popular books showed me that often best-selling books are someone sharing their ideas, with little connection to previous works and theory. Therefore they should be viewed carefully and thoughtfully, without swallowing the whole idea hook, line, and sinker.

I understand better now, why it’s important that the books that we reference for our reflection papers for each competency need to be books of substance, grounded in research.

Comments (1) »

Getting the Headings Right in Word

I’ve written already about what I learned from the book, Writing Your Dissertation with Word.

Based on that reading, when I started writing my dissertation proposal, I started with the template on the AU Leadership participant website.

Soon, though, I found that the headings were not in the format required by Andrews – 3 spaces before, 2 spaces after.  So I figured out how to edit the styles.

In Word 2003 to the left of the style pull down menu is a double AA icon. That brings up a window with all the styles on the right. From there you can click on the pull down menu, and choose Modify. Then Format, Paragraph… I made the “before spacing” 12 pt. When I saved, it updated all 18 of my headings. Voila!! 🙂

Yet another reason to learn to use styles and templates!

Leave a comment »

Learning about UDL

In the learning competency, I plan to learn about UDL or Universal Design for Learning. So I signed up for a workshop at MACUL to learn more about it. Here are my notes. 

This afternoon I’m participating in David Grapka’s workshop titled Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is Like Differentiated Instruction (DI) on Steroids!

What makes a UDL classroom? Having a welcoming environment. How do we advocate for all children? The way he modeled that is giving us his cell phone so we could text him questions!

What we need is more people who specialize in the impossible”. Theodore Roethke

A vision of students today (scroll down) from Kansas State University. Look at their other videos too.  What resonated with you most as an educator and consumer?

For the rookies on UDL: Center for Applied Special Technology is THE place to learn about UDL. These videos explain UDL. After each video, David asked us what resonated with us.

Books mentioned:

UDL principle: Creating environments that work well for students with disabilities makes the environments work for everyone. Teachers rethink goals, methods and assessments.

From my seatmate, Cathy: Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age.

Example – a curb cut started out as an accommodation for wheelchairs, but skateboarders use it, people with strollers, luggage, etc. It helps everyone.

The handouts have a PowerPoint that compares UDL and assistive technology.

RTI: Regular Teacher Involvement; a whole school initiative

Brain Research video – three networks for learning – recognition networks (what), strategic networks (how), affective networks (why). Everybody learns differently.

UDL curriculum: multiple means of representation, multiple means of expression, multiple means of engagement, flexible tools, teaching methods and assessment.

He played each video twice! It was great because you got something new the next time around.  

There’s a serious disconnect between mandated state testing and new research on student learning and teaching.  Tomorrow David is addressing this in his 4 p.m. session.

——

After the break we looked at TRECenter.org Practices. This is what David does in New York. These materials can help you design your own UDL lesson plans.

How is a UDL lesson different than any other lesson plan? What I noticed includes:

  • The planning pyramid has “all students will…” “most students will…” “some students will…” “some other students will”
  • The unit includes modifications for meeting academic diversity.

This is a template for a UDL lesson/unit plan.

We did an activity using these sites:

Leave a comment »